In this paper I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of plea bargaining. I will define plea bargaining, distinguish between charge bargaining and sentence bargaining, and I will describe how plea bargaining reflects the crime control and due process models in criminal justice.
Many criminal cases are settled outside of the courts by having both sides come to a mutual agreement. This is the process known as negotiating a plea or simply plea bargaining. Plea bargaining is common for many reasons. Plea bargaining makes it possible for defendants to avoid the time and cost of defending themselves at trial, the risk of a harsher punishment, and the publicity of a trial. Plea bargaining can also save the prosecution time and money by avoiding
…show more content…
a lengthy trial, both the prosecution and the defendant are spared the uncertainty of going to trial and the court system is able to avoid the burden of conducting a trial for every crime. Usually during a plea bargaining the defendant will plead guilty to a lesser charge or to only one charger is there are several charges. Plea bargaining may also require a guilty plea as charged, with the prosecution asking for leniency in the sentencing phase. However, the judge is not required to follow the recommendations of the prosecution. Many plea bargains have to be approved by the court however, not all require approval. Prosecutors may be able to drop charges in order for the defendant to plead guilty to a lesser charge without court approval. In plea bargaining there are two types of bargaining charge bargaining and sentence bargaining.
In charge bargaining the prosecutor can negotiate with the defendant on the charges that could be filed. With charge bargaining, if the defendant agrees to plead guilty to one of the options of charges the court most approve the plea bargain. In sentence bargaining, the defendant may agree to plead guilty to a charge in exchange for a lighter sentence. If the defendant does plead guilty to a charge for a lighter sentence, it still has to be approved by the court. This is a risky plea bargain considering that the judge does not have to comply with the prosecutions recommendation and could still end up serving a harsh …show more content…
sentence. What are the advantages and disadvantages of plea bargaining? Let’s start with the advantage. Plea bargaining can avoid delay, stress, and cost of a lengthy trail. Plea bargaining can also allow the prosecution to withdraw its case which gives the prosecutions the ability to better manage their case load. Plea bargains allow the defendant a little more control over the case, by accepting a plea bargain the defendant is able to take away the uncertainty of a trial and also avoid the maximum sentence. Plea bargaining is very beneficial to the public defenders, this gives them more time to focus on cases that will actually be going to trial and be better prepared for those trials. Let’s look at disadvantages of plea bargaining now.
Some disadvantages can be that the public feels as though the defendant got away with the crime or the sentence was too lenient. A major disadvantage is that innocent people actually accept a plea bargain pleading guilty to a lesser charge to avoid the risk of possibly being found guilty at a trial. “Some attorneys and judges argue that plea bargaining has led to poor police investigations and attorneys who do not take the time to properly prepare their cases. They believe that instead of pursuing justice, the parties rely on making a deal and that the details of what happened and the legal consequences for those actions are less important.” (CITE 2)It has also been argued that plea bargaining is unconstitutional because it takes away the defendant’s constitutional right to have a trial by jury. “If the defendant is coerced or pressured into a plea bargain agreement the argument may have weight. However, if the defendant, at all times in the criminal case, retains the right to trial by jury without pressure to make an agreement the courts have found that plea bargaining remains constitutional.” ( CITE
2) When the defendant chooses to accept a plea bargain, they have basically waived their right to due process. By accepting the plea bargain this is benefical to the crime control model and keeps the courts from becoming overwhelmed with caseloads going to trial. With the plea bargaining process this becomes a swift deliverance of justice. By plea bargaining the prosecutors clear caseloads, and provides law enforcement the gratification of having achieved something meaningful through the arrest and investigation efforts. Of course, there is a downside to this. The defendant can come back later and claim their confession was coerced.
Plea bargains are one of the most controversial debates that are discussed over the criminal justice court system. A plea bargain is when a defendant agrees to plead guilty to a crime and in exchange for something, for example a lesser sentence. There are three types of plea bargains. Charge bargaining is when a defendant pleads guilty to a less serious charge than the original charge. Count bargaining is when the defendant pleads guilty for some of the charge, but not all. Sentence bargaining is when the defendants get a lesser sentence than the maximum penalty. Through the course of this semester it has been brought to our attention, multiple times, about the problems plea bargaining has caused. Many defendants are pressured by those who surround them in
A plea bargain is compliance between a prosecutor and defendant in which the accused offender agrees to plead guilty in return for some compromise from the prosecutor. The New Jim Crow, explains how most Americans have no clue on how common it is for people to be prosecuted without proper legal representation and are sentenced to jail when innocent out of fear. Tens of thousands of poor people go to jail every year without ever talking to a lawyer that could possibly help them. Over four decades ago, the American Supreme Court ruled that low-income people who are accused of serious crimes are entitled to council, but thousands of people are processed through America’s courts annually with a low resource lawyer, or no lawyer at all. Sometimes
Plea bargaining describes a deal between the prosecutor and the defense attorney, who represents the defendant, that they negotiate a deal for either a lesser conviction or a lesser se...
Plea bargaining is an agreement between the Crown and the defendant in a criminal case. The Crown gives the accused an opportunity to plead guilty to a lesser charge for a lighter sentence or; to the same charge with a lighter sentence than the maximum sentence the Crown would have sought in a trial setting. There are numerous reasons why an accused would accept a plea bargain and why the Crown would offer one. One of the
The two models of crime that have been opposing each other for years are the due process model and the crime control model. The due process model is the principle that an individual cannot be deprived of life, liberty, or property without appropriate legal procedures and safeguards. ( Answers.Com) Any person that is charged with a crime is required to have their rights protected by the criminal justice system under the due process model. The crime control model for law enforcement is based on the assumption of absolute reliability of police fact-finding, treats arrestees as if they are already found guilty. (Crime control model) This paper will compare and contrast the role that the due process and crime control models have on shaping criminal procedure policy.
There are many advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the accused plea bargaining. Plea bargaining happens when the accused pleads guilty to a crime and in return the prosecution agrees on a lighter sentence or reduced charges (Siegel, Schmalleger, Worrall, 2011). In some cases the prosecution agrees to both. There are many advantages to an accused plea bargaining. Some advantages includes saving the courts money, time, and resources. There are also disadvantages to plea bargaining. Some disadvantages is that prosecutors may charged the accused with a higher charge, non-guilty defendants may plead guilty, and defense attorneys not getting paid may talk their client into plea bargaining. Criminal who chose to plea bargain also are able to move through the court process faster and resolve their case sooner.
Some unusual scenarios have come about due to these laws, particularly in California; some defendants have been given sentences of 25 years to life for such petty crimes as shoplifting golf clubs or stealing a slice of pizza from a child on the beach or a double sentence of 50 years to life for stealing nine video tapes from two different stores while child molesters, rapists and murderers serve only a few years. As a result of some of these scenarios the three strikes sentences have prompted harsh criticism not only within the United States but from outside the country as well (Campbell). Many questions have now arisen concerning the “three strikes” laws such as alternatives to incarceration for non-heinous crimes, what would happen if the state got rid of “strikes” and guaranteed that those convicted of a serious crime serve their full sentence? It is imperative to compare the benefits and the costs and the alternatives to incarceration when de...
In 1968, Herbert Packer was a Stanford University law professor who constructed two models of criminal process, due process and crime control. The due process model was Packer’s view that criminal defendants should be presumed innocent, courts must protect suspects’ rights, and there must be come limits placed on police powers. The crime control model is a model that emphasizes law and order and argues that every effort must be made to suppress crime, and to try, convict, and incarcerate offenders. Packer’s crime control model suggested that most cases ended in guilty please or withdrawals. In contrast, his due process model suggested that cases that go to trail and are appealed were the most influential. The due process and crime control model differentiate in
This paper will be focusing on the courts as the specific sub-system in the criminal justice system. As said in the book the court system is responsible for charging criminal suspects, carrying out trials, and sentencing a person convicted of a crime. The fear of crime influences criminal justice policies in the court system. One way it does this is with the courts sentencing. Courts are able to give out severe punishments as a method of deterrence. This specific type of deterrence would be general deterrence. The book says that general deterrence theory should work if the punishment is clear, severe, and done swiftly. According to this theory, crime rate should drop because people will fear the punishment. The other way fear of crime influences
The criminal trial process is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society to a great extent. For the law to be effective, the criminal trial process must reflect what is accepted by society to be a breach of moral and ethical conduct and the extent to which protections are granted to the victims, the offenders and the community. For these reasons, the criminal trial process is effectively able to achieve this in the areas of the adversary system, the system of appeals, legal aid and the jury system.
A plea bargain can be defined as, “a negotiation between the defendant and his attorney on one side and the prosecutor on the other, in which the defendant agrees to plead “guilty” or “no contest” to some crimes, in return for reduction of the severity of the charges, dismissal of some of the charges, the prosecutor’s willingness to recommend a particular sentence or some other benefit to the defendant. Sometimes one element of the bargain is that the defendant reveal information such as location of stolen goods, names of others participating in the crime or admission of other crimes. The judge must agree to the result of the plea bargain before accepting the plea. If he does not, then the bargain is cancelled.”
The use of evidence and witnesses is a mechanism in which the law attempts to balance the rights of victims and offenders in the criminal trial process. Evidence used in court are bound by the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and have to be lawfully obtained by the police. The use of evidence and witnesses balance the victims’ rights to a great extent. However, it is ineffective in balancing the rights of offenders. The law has been progressive in protecting the rights of victims in the use and collection of evidence and witness statements. The Criminal Procedure Amendment (Domestic Violence Complainants) Bill 2014, which amends the Criminal Procedure Act 1986, passed the NSW Legislative Council on 18 November 2014. The amendment enables victims of
DELIBERATING CRIME AND PUNISHMENT: A WAY OUT OF GET TOUGH JUSTICE? Criminology & Public Policy, 5(1), 37-43. Retrieved November 23, 2010, from Criminal Justice Periodicals. (Document ID: 1016637721).
Plea bargaining is an agreement between the defendant and prosecutor wherein the defendant agrees to plead guilty to a particular charge in order to obtain some concession from the prosecutor in a criminal case, this might mean that the defendant will plead guilty to the original criminal charge to receive a relatively lenient sentence .
Indeterminate sentencing involves the judge handing down the sentence, specifying what the maximum and the minimum sentence is. However, the actual length of time served is determined by the parole board. Determinate sentencing involves prisoners being released early for good behavior. In other words, these inmates are given credits for good behavior or for participation in projects, experiments or educational programs (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2011). The credits, in turn, reduce the sentencing.